Subject:
|
Re: Informations on new TECHNIC element and color coded parts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Fri, 18 May 2007 02:56:34 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
15082 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.technic, Stump Dunn wrote:
> > If I think of Technic as about function, not form...
>
> Sure, if im building a conceptual MOC, i'll use any
> colour then when i happy with the function, i'll rebuild
> it in the colour i want till im happy with the form.
Agreed. Which is when I'd need to go to Bricklink, or hopefully other themes, to
try to get the part I want in the color I want. My point was for the Technic
*theme*, standardized colors to highlight function or make finding small pieces
easier is likely a good design goal. It's *not* what I want when making a
"final" model... but that's not how (I perceive) LEGO is marketing them.
> True, some parts need to be standardised, and in my
> view some do not. I also believe that some that are
> standardised could be just as easily identifyable or
> producable in a colour that the part was once made
> in. Finaly, i believe standardisation does not need
> to go any further.
OK. I really can't argue that you do or do not believe these things. I can make
points explaining why this sort of shift might make good sense from the
standpoint of the company, or might have some logic behind them. That's really
all I was trying to do.
> I think a compromise needs to be found.
I agree a compromise would be nice... kind of like how I'd like LEGO to make all
pieces in all possible colors, and also make them all availible in LEGO Factory
/ on-line PaB. But unless I can make a really good sound argument to the company
that that would increase their profit or be a fundamental aspect of their
mission statement, it's just wishful thinking.
> > From my perspective, it would seem the rules
> > are based on the goals of the theme. I don't
> > think of this as double standards, as much as
> > I see it as coming from different design goals
> > for different themes.
>
> Can you please define the goals for us?
Eegad no - I'm just like you here, on the outside looking in. I have no idea
what the "true" goals are here, any more than you do: I'm just suggesting some
possibilities that seem rational to me.
> I thought there was just one vision, to play
> well ?
If that was all there was to it, then I suspect there would only be one "theme"
as well. That is clearly not the case, (there does appear to be several themes),
so I assume each theme probably has a specific target audience, and a specific
goal in mind: Technic, for instance, would seem to have a goal of building
functional mechanical mechanisms. Model Team seemed to be oriented slightly
differently, combining form and function slightly more. Duplo has very little
functionality at all, but is carefully designed to be easier for small hands to
assemble and enjoy. Those seem, to me, to be slightly different "visions" for
the different product lines.
> > since the transmission driving ring just came out
> > recently... those need the old axle joiners,
> > correct?).
>
> Yes they need axle joiners. The tans joiners will
> not be noticable under a now standardised red driving
> ring.
Well, if that was the only consideration (and I'm sure it's not; as I said, I
don't understand that standardization in particular), great, then the color
doesn't matter in the Technic line, and they can use whatever standard color
they want, making parts sorting easier. Again, it comes down to how you use the
product... and I'm suggesting that it may make sense in a product line oriented
more and more towards function, to color code things. I may not like it... but I
can see how it could make sense.
--
Brian Davis
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
38 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
